Looking at our world from a theological perspective, this is the Theology Central Podcast. Making theology central. Good morning, everyone. It is Wednesday, January the 8th, 2025. It is currently 10.03 a.m. Central Time, and I am coming to you live from the Theology Central studio located right here in Abilene, Texas. I don't know if you could hear me picking up things as I was giving you the introduction, but I have here in my hands an iPad. I have right here next to me an actual physical Bible. I have a notebook. I have a pencil. So I've got technology. I've got kind of the old technology. I've got physical things. So I have a little mixture of things going on here, but all, but everything we are about to do is all about moving into the future and how the future is going to be greatly shaped by a very important piece of technology. Whether you like it or not, It is here and we started talking about this last Sunday. I spent two plus hours on Sunday talking about artificial intelligence and how I believe it's going to have a profound impact on Christianity, on religion in general. And in some ways, I mean, I was pretty bold in my assessment and I know some people probably didn't necessarily like it. I believe AI has reached a point where it really makes the church, it makes pastors, Bible teachers, even those of us doing theological podcasts, it makes us completely irrelevant. You don't need a pastor. You don't need a church. You don't need a Christian podcast because of what AI can do. Now, I know that's a major statement, and on Sunday I spent, what, two hours, in some cases, trying to outline and explain what AI can do, and what was fascinating about how those two hours went. And you can go back and listen to those messages. In fact, we've created an entire series on AI and the future of the church, because we're going to be talking about artificial intelligence all of 2025. We're going to be talking about it over and over and over again, and we're going to be utilizing it frequently and I'm going to do my very best to teach you how to use it because I think that's going to become really the role of the church is really now teaching people how to utilize this tool because the tool is not going away. So you really I think it's almost now you've got discipleship is going to be saying hey here's how to utilize AI in your Christian life. I think it's really what it's going to become. I know that sounds far-fetched and crazy but I really do believe that. But so I did my very best to try to explain that, but what I was going to say is at the end of the second hour, what was fascinating is something happened that kind of proved my entire point, right? Because I talked about it as I was wrapping everything up, I said, okay, next week we get back to Isaiah 40, and I think starting in verse 8 and following. And what did someone do? Someone in the congregation took their phone, used AI, and within like 5 seconds, 10 seconds, already had a summary and an analysis of that entire section of Isaiah 40, right there on their phone. They just typed in Isaiah 40, basically analyzed Isaiah 48 through following, and they had it right there. right there on their phone. Why even show up to church next week? They already have a complete—depending on how in-depth they want to go, they can have a full exegetical study right there typed out by AI without ever even coming to church. They could get in their car by the time they arrive at church. They could already have a complete exegetical study of that section of Scripture in their hand right there on their phone. So I love the fact that that happened at the end because it kind of proved my point. So we are going to continue to talk about this. We're going to continue to try to figure this out. And what we're going to do in this hour, hour, hour and a half, however long this takes, This is going to get this. We're going to dry something in real time. I have done no prep beforehand. I know what I want to do, but I'm going to be walking through this with you in real time. So just please be patient. There may be some Some technical glitches here. There may be some difficulties here. Things may not work smoothly. There may be some moments of dead air. I know as a broadcaster, you never want dead air, but there may be a little bit of that, but hopefully this goes smoothly and hopefully you find it to be fascinating and beneficial. So here's what we're going to do. I'm going to demonstrate to you the abilities of artificial intelligence to analyze a sermon within seconds and be able to point out some very specific things in sermons. So this is what I'm going to do. I'm going to be going to the sermon audio website, sermonaudio.com. I'm going to click on the tab for sermons. Then I'm going to click on the tab for newest sermons. I'm going to start choosing a sermon. I'm going to choose a sermon randomly, and then I'm going to go to it, and then I'm going to walk you through the process. Ultimately, I'm going to download the transcript of that sermon, and then I'm going to upload that transcript to AI. I'm going to ask AI to analyze it and look for specific things. then when it's going to give me its analysis, and then I'm going to walk you through the analysis because I want you to see how quickly AI can do this. And then you can determine what this means for preaching and sermons and the church moving forward. All right. This is awesome. So here's what I'm going to be utilizing. I have an iPad. So I'm going to be using the Sermon Audio website and iPad. I will download the sermon transcript to files. Then I'm going to open up chat GPT. upload the file to chat gpt and then i'm going to ask it to look for very specific things then when i'm going to walk you through its response then i may ask follow-up questions or i may ask it to do something else and i want you to just see how quickly it can do this and how I think transform, I mean, it's gonna change, it should change everything. You may disagree, but we're gonna see this. Now, again, we're doing this in real time. I could have done all of this in advance and have it all ready to go, but that would defeat the purpose. The purpose here, I really believe, Christian podcasters and the church, we're going to have to, you can try to fight it. You can try to push back. AI is here. It's not going away. It's not a fad. It's here to stay. You're just going to have to accept that. You can try to reject it. You can try to deny it. You can try to push back. It's here. So whether you can reject it or you can say, well, then what do we do with this? And here is one thing that can be done with it. And I don't know if a lot of preachers are going to necessarily like this. I think a lot of pastors are really going to hate this. All right. So are you ready? Here we go. So I'm going to first, I'm going to unplug my iPad because I had it charging because you know, my iPad was down to like, I don't know, 5%. So I got it charged a little bit. So if I have to plug it back in, I will. So I'm going to sermonaudio.com, sermonaudio.com. I'm tapping on sermons and I'm going, gone to newest sermons. And I'm going to do a refresh here because I did have this open. Hang on, it's doing a refresh. Oh wow, and a bunch of sermons have already been added. Okay, so yeah, that's a whole lot of sermons just got uploaded. So I'm gonna just go through this and see what we can find here, all right? Here's a walk to the wise, a walk to the wise. I'm gonna click on it. A walk to the wise. A walk filled with the Spirit brings a life of joy, thanksgiving, peace with God. The biblical text is Ephesians 5, 15 through 21. So, I'm going to come down here. Oh, they don't have the transcript. Why do they not have the transcript available? That's weird. Okay, hang on. I'm gonna do a refresh. I told you there was gonna be some technical glitches. Where is it? Well, okay, hang on. Yeah, this is not working out exactly as I thought. Yeah, I don't know why they don't have the transcript there. Okay, so let me go back. I mean, don't all the messages have the transcript? Do they have that feature turned off or something? Okay, sometimes you see churches not using the technology even available to them. Okay, here's one a little further, farther, if I should speak correctly. Oh, this one has a transcript. All right, this one has no scripture reference given. See, it's, okay, so here's the first thing we're gonna have to, well, let's just go ahead and do this, all right? So this is funny, but it's very telling. One of the things I get sometimes frustrated about is how far behind churches can be when it comes to technology and when it comes to different things available to them, right? Churches can already create podcasts. They've been able to do that forever. Do they do that? No. Why not? I'll never understand, right? Even churches who are on Sermon Audio, in many cases, they don't even use the features available. For example, how many times when you go to a live webcast, you'll look and nobody's using the metadata. Why would you not fill out the metadata? It'll just say live webcast. Use the metadata. Well, In many cases, when you can fill out the information, and they do fill out the information, sometimes it'll be missing things like scripture reference or all kinds of things. Or in some case, that one sermon didn't have the transcript. Why does it not have the transcript feature going? What happened there? Utilize everything. This one is called A Little Farther. It looks like the scripture where it typically is, it's not there. So above it, they have Matthew 26. So I'm assuming it's gonna be in Matthew 26. They do have the raw transcript. So here's what we're looking for. So if you wanna look at it, I'm just gonna click over here. Yeah, that works better. Okay. A Little Farther, F-A-R-T-H-E-R. This is from Gospel Baptist Church. All right. So this is the first one we found. I wanted to do that walk to the wise. That sounded interesting. The title caught my attention. Maybe we'll have to just do a review of that one. Okay, but A Little Farther. Go down here, the raw transcript auto. So I'm going to click on it. I click on it. Now, the iPad is asking me, do you want to download this transcript? And I want to hit Download. OK, it just downloaded the transcript. Now, I'm going to go here. All right. I'm going to. I'm going to go here. Give me one second. I'm going to open up chat GPT. I'm going to chat GPT. Now what I'm going to do is I'm going to hit the little plus symbol. I'm going to go to attach files. There is the transcript I downloaded at 10.14 AM. I'm going to hit Open. All right. Now, I'm going to ask AI. Here's what I'm asking AI. So you know exactly what I'm asking for. I'm asking AI, analyze the following sermon. Summarize it and outline any factual errors, philological errors, or inconsistencies. logical fallacies, biblical and textual errors, list discussion questions, and things for further study based on this sermon. Sound good? That's the prompt that I have created to ask AI to handle a particular sermon. Now, I could ask it to do many other things with the sermon, but that's what I've chosen to ask it to do in this particular case for this live demonstration, all right? Here we go, pressing basically the enter button. All right, and here is AI. It's already done. Here's an analysis of the sermon based on the transcript provided. Summary of the sermon. The sermon focuses on the theme of going a little farther, and faith, prayer, and obedience to God. Using Matthew 26, 39 as the central text, the speaker highlights how Jesus went farther in the garden while the disciples slept. The message urges believers to go beyond the minimum in their spiritual lives by committing to fervent prayer and service. Various biblical examples are used to reinforce this point, such as Elijah on Mount Carmel, Hannah's prayer for a child, and Solomon's request for wisdom. The sermon also draws modern examples like George Muller and John Hyde, emphasizing persistent faith and action. So go a little further. Come on, let's go further in our Christian life. Let's go further in our spiritual life. You can get the idea where the sermon is going. The outline of the sermon, it offers, this is the introduction of the sermon, the context of Jesus' prayer in the garden in Matthew 26, the disciples' failure to stay awake and support Jesus, the phrase, he went a little farther as the key focus. Uh-oh, okay, I can already see some possible problems, but okay. that's the introduction. It gives the context, it talks about the disciples' failures to stay awake, and then it takes the phrase in Matthew 26 that he went a little farther. Now, it's going to take that phrase and then turn it into, yeah, we could have a long discussion here, right? Number two, So the second thing is the biblical examples of going a little farther. Hannah's prayer in 1 Samuel 1, persistent prayer for a child. Elijah on Mount Carmel, bold prayer for fire from heaven. Solomon, asking for wisdom instead of riches. Jabez's prayer, request for blessing and enlargement. Hezekiah, praying for extension of life in 2 Kings 20. These are all people who went a little farther. That's the idea being presented here, all right? Number three, historical examples of going a little further. George Mueller prayed for provision for orphans. John Hyde, known for his prayer life and ministry in India. 4. Application and Challenge Encouragement to pray persistently and fervently. Importance of aligning actions with faith. Treating others with kindness and generosity, not just offering words. So that's kind of the outline of the sermon. So within literally seconds, it gave me the entire outline of the sermon, gave me an entire summary of the sermon. I already know what that sermon about. I don't even have to listen to it. Within seconds, I have it all broken completely down for me, all completely. Now, if I was looking, if a pastor was trying to come up with an idea for a sermon, he could already take this. It's already broken down for him. He can modify, change a little bit. He'd already have his sermon within seconds. And don't think pastors won't use it this way. They will, because pastors have been using commentaries to build their sermons forever. So they're going to use this, all right? There's the breakdown. Now, I could already start analyzing that breakdown and start pointing out some possible problems, but we won't go into that. So then AI says, here's some factual and theological possible problems. Number one, contextual misrepresentation. The claim that the disciples could see the garden from the upper room is likely incorrect based on historical geography. The upper room was likely in Jerusalem while the Garden of Gethsemane was across the Kidron Valley. All right, so in the sermon, there's the claim that the disciples could see the garden from the upper room. That's a claim made in the sermon. AI immediately is like, wait a minute, this is possibly not correct. In fact, it's likely incorrect because the upper room was likely in Jerusalem while the garden was across the Kidron Valley. So, now you may say, well, that's no big deal. That's a big deal because in a sermon, you want to be as accurate as you can possibly get. Now, what happened? Most likely, most likely, the pastor saw that in some book or from some other source. Now, we would have to verify if AI is correct here. So who is correct? So that's the question we would have to look at. Could the disciples have seen the garden from the upper room? Now, what significance would it have made? Now, we would have to review the sermon to hear what was the significance of that? What was the point trying to be made? Maybe I'll ask AI what point the sermon was trying to make about this claim. Maybe we'll do that here in a minute. Number two. I'm sorry, not number two. So the way AI breaks this down is that it classifies contextual misrepresentations, and then it doesn't call them one or two. It just says, number one, contextual misrepresentations. And then the first contextual misrepresentation is the idea that the disciples could see the garden from the upper room. The next one is, it is implied that the disciples should have volunteered to go with Jesus. However, Jesus specifically instructed the disciples to remain behind while he went to pray. So the preacher seems to imply that the disciples should have volunteered to go with Jesus. However, that seems to ignore the fact that Jesus instructed them specifically to stay behind. So, is that not important? I think that's important, all right? Interpretation of James 2. This is the second possible factual and theological issue. The sermon interprets James 2 as emphasizing works as evidence of faith for others to see. This is generally acceptable, but it leans into the common dichotomy of justification before men versus justification before God, without fully engaging with James' deeper theological argument. So basically what it is saying is the sermon goes to the book of James, takes a verse, just grabs some verses, makes some claims, but it doesn't really go into this dichotomy of justification before men versus justification before God. So, does our faith—well, we could get into a whole discussion. In other words, it's not dealing with the issues that the book of James raises when it comes to the subject of justification. if that makes sense. Next, simplistic assumptions about prayer results. Statements implying that fervent prayer always leads to miraculous outcomes, healing, or provision can be very misleading. Scripture also records faithful prayers that were not answered as expected, for example, Paul's thorn in the flesh. So the sermon kind of gave this simplistic idea, hey, if you'll just go a little further in prayer, boom, guess what? You're going to get these miraculous outcomes. Well, that sets up a false expectation and a false idea in the minds of people. They go a little further in their prayer in 2025 and the cancer doesn't go away. This doesn't get better. And this happens and this happens. So it doesn't always mean that that's the case. Next, historical details. The story of George Mueller praying for provision for orphans is accurate, but the reference to fleecing sarcastically oversimplifies his ministry. This may unintentionally confuse the point being made. Alright, so some logical fallacies in the sermon. False equivalence. The sermon seems to equate the disciples' failure to stay awake in the garden with a lack of preparation for spiritual emergencies, but this may be an overreach. Their fatigue could have been more related to their humanity than to their spiritual shortcomings. Oh, that's good. False equivalence. See, what does the sermon do? The disciples fell asleep in the garden. See, they weren't prepared spiritually. May not have anything to do with them not being prepared spiritually. Maybe the fact that they were human beings and they were exhausted. Now that doesn't preach as well. That doesn't. Hey, they fall asleep. This is a sign of their spiritual apathy, their spiritual being not being prepared. It could just be that they're human beings and we're tired. See, it's kind of a false equivalency. Guess how many sermons approach it that way. Almost all sermons go after the disciples for, they're not being very spiritual. They're not being very godly. How are you falling asleep in your spiritual life? that preaches good may be a complete misrepresentation of the actual text. All right, hang on, let's continue here. Wait a minute, here we go. Let me go back up here. I ended up clicking off of this. So false equivalency. Second, overgeneralization. The claim that most people are content to do the minimum can come across as an unfair blanket statement rather than a nuanced observation. Now that's common in preaching. I do that all the time. You can kind of overgeneralize. I'll say, Christians or Christianity or the church and I speak of it in an overgeneralized way that's pretty common in preaching and so a lot of times people will point that out and get frustrated by that and what you have to say is look if it's applicable then okay if it's not but I get the idea so the The false equivalency is more important to me than the overgeneralization. The historical possible or the geographical error, that's a big one. How they handled James, that's common in most preaching. So then, The AI offers me the biblical and textual issues with the sermon. It cites Luke 22, 40. The sermon implies that all 11 disciples were explicitly commanded to stay awake and pray, but Jesus primarily focused with Peter, James, and John in that intimate moment. So the sermon seems to imply all 11 disciples were explicitly commanded to stay awake and pray, but is that accurate? you could look at that. Second, fasting and praying in Mark 9.29. The sermon emphasizes fasting, though some translations omit fasting due to manuscript differences. A more nuanced approach to the textual variations would be helpful. So the point is, you quote Mark 9.29, don't talk about textual variants. Now, to be fair, The church in question may be KJV only, and so it doesn't care about textual variants because it just basically says the King James basically is inspired scripture. So it doesn't matter if there's any textual variants because the King James is just right. So that could explain why they did not. Now, discussion questions. AI gives me five discussion questions on this sermon. Number one, how does the phrase, he went a little farther, challenge our current spiritual disciplines? They say that would come from the text or from the sermon. Now, I would push back. That phrase, Jesus went a little further, should it even be applied to me in any way, shape, or form? It's just literally speaking. The text is literal. It just says Jesus went a little farther. He went a little further, however you would like to say it. They were here, he moved forward. Am I supposed to draw some great spiritual principle from that? I don't know. Number two, what does true perseverance and prayer look like in the modern life? That's a good question. Number three, how do we reconcile unanswered prayers with biblical examples of miraculous answers? Well, that's a good question. Number four, in what ways can our actions reflect our faith in practical situations? Number five, how can we avoid legalism while striving to go a little farther in our spiritual lives? Those are good questions. I'm going to come back and ask AI about some of these, all right? So hang on. Further study suggestions. Study the geography of the garden. Explore biblical maps to understand the physical location mentioned. So because the sermon makes the claim that the disciples could see the garden from the upper room, AI is like, well, hey, this is what you need to do. Go explore a biblical map. Where would the upper room have been? Where is the garden? Could they have seen it? Is it possible? I like the fact that AI is like, go study this to verify. We could do that. Number two, compare translations. Examine how different Bible versions handle the inclusion or omission of fasting in Mark 9, 29. 3. James 2, 14-26 Study James' teaching on faith and works and compare it to Paul's teaching and Romans. 4. Research prayer in church history. Study historical examples of prayer movements to understand the role of intercession. Number five, read George Mueller's biography, delve deeper into Mueller's prayer life to get a fuller picture of his ministry. Then AI asked me, would you like any additional details or a focus on specific parts of the sermon? Please note, AI did all of that within five seconds. If I would have listened to that entire sermon and try to do all of that, it would have taken me And that's not even an exaggeration. It would probably have taken me five, six hours, maybe even 10 hours to put all of that together. It did that within five seconds, ladies and gentlemen. If you don't under, this is gonna have a profound impact on preaching. Basically any sermon can be fact-checked within five seconds. So I'm gonna ask it a question. What was the point of claiming the disciples could see the garden from the upper room. All right, so I'm asking it a specific question. All right, so this is what AI says. The claim that the disciples could see the garden from the upper room appears to be an attempt to emphasize the physical and emotional proximity of the events leading up to Jesus' crucifixion. By suggesting that the garden was visible from the upper room, the speaker may have been trying to create a vivid mental picture that heightens the contrast between how close the disciples were to Jesus in distance versus how distant they were in spiritual vigilance and support. possible points the speaker was trying to make. Closeness versus failure. The idea reinforces the narrative that even though the disciples were physically close to Jesus, they failed to go a little further with him in prayer and support, emphasizing their spiritual unpreparedness. a missed opportunity. By making it seem as though the garden was just a short walk away, the preachers may have been underscoring how easily the disciples could have gone with Jesus and demonstrated their loyalty if they had been more spiritually aware. 3. Symbolism of Accessibility The preacher may have used the imagery of proximity to symbolize that God's calling and opportunities for prayer and obedience are always within reach, but people often miss them out of complacency. However, since this detail isn't supported by historical geography, it may unintentionally distort the narrative and take away from actual emotional intensity of the biblical account, where the disciples' failure was not due to ignorance of the moment's significance, but rather their human frailty in the face of exhaustion and fear. So AI even tries to interpret what the pastor was trying to do with this claim, but then clearly tears it apart, saying the claim just does not claim doesn't fit the actual facts. And sermons do this all the time. So many times, the people in the pew, they don't really care if facts are being stated. They just like when it sounds spiritual. They just like when it feels like a sermon. But giving you a sermon that actually distorts the facts, no matter how spiritual the points may be, if the spiritual points are based off inaccurate information, does that not disqualify the spiritual points. But let's ask it another question. Is it even biblically, let's see, is it even biblically accurate, hang on here, to take the phrase, hang on, if I can type right, to take the phrase If I can type right here to take the phrase, go, went a little, went a little further and turn that into some challenge for us. All right, so hang on, we're gonna see what AI has to say here. The phrase, he went a little further in Matthew 26, 39, in its biblical context is a description of Jesus' physical movement in the garden, as he distanced himself from his disciples to pray alone. Theologically, this movement illustrates Jesus' unique role in salvation history, bearing the full weight of obedience and submission to the Father's will in a way that no one else could. Therefore, turning this phrase into a general challenge for Christians to go further in prayer or faith may not align with the original purpose of the text. Shocking! Are you telling me that a sermon actually does not align with the original purpose of the text? This has got to be the first time in history, ladies and gentlemen. This has to be the first example in history where a sermon does not align with the original purpose of the text. I'm being as sarcastic as I can be. Sermon after sermon after sermon after sermon. constantly does not align with the original purpose of the text. They take the sermon, they take the text to make a sermon. The text is not there for you to make a sermon. The text is there for us to study and understand it. And it doesn't always make for the best preaching. But hey, don't let the text get in the way of a good sermon. You can just take it, mold it, You can do what, it's like Plato. You can just turn it into, oh, look at this. I turned it into a good sermon. Everybody's like, oh, that was a good sermon. That was so convicting. That was so challenging. And somebody just needs to raise their hand and go, and none of that had anything, any connection with the original purpose or intent of the text. But if you do that, then you're the nitpicky one and you're being, you know, nobody likes you and you're the problem. Well, no, the problem is, is the sermon took a text did something with it that has nothing to do with the original intent of the text. The biblical context of the phrase go a little further. Number one, the narrative purpose. The phrase, he went a little further, simply shows that Jesus physically withdrew to pray privately. This highlights his deep distress, which led him to seek solitude with the Father. That's the purpose of the narrative, the theological significance. Jesus going further represents his submission to God's will in a way that the disciples, by extension, all humanity, could not. If you really want to get somewhere, if you really want to preach this into a sermon, Jesus went a little farther. Jesus went and said, not my will, but your will be done. Jesus went a little further to obey the will of God, to do the will of God, to perfectly fulfill the law. for us because we can't do it because we, as humans, we are sinners. The fact that he went further is not a challenge for me to go further. It's more of an explanation that he has to go further because we cannot do it. By taking the fact that Jesus went further and then turning it into, hey, you need to go further in your prayer, you need to go further in your obedience, is a misrepresentation of the entire point. Jesus went further because we can't. We're limited by our human frailty, our sinfulness. Jesus going farther represents his submission to God's will in a way that the disciples and by extension all humanity could not. It is a moment of profound contrast between Jesus' obedience and the disciples' failure to stay awake and support him. That's the point you should get. We can't do it. We can't. He did. Our salvation is not based on us trying harder, doing more. It's based on the fact that He did it all, and He's perfect. How do we so turn the text upside down? What the text is actually saying, we turn it into, hey guys, you need to go further, turning it into something we're supposed to do. No, it's about the fact that He did, because we can't. The sermon literally destroyed the entire text. Challenges to make it a general principle, Christ's unique role, Jesus' act of going further in the garden reflects his unique role in salvation. Applying it as a challenge for Christians can risk downplaying the fact that only Jesus could go farther in bearing the cup of suffering, God's wrath for sin. 2. The Textual Intention The Gospels do not present this phrase as a moral command for believers. Instead, it narrates a historical moment to emphasize Jesus' resolve and the disciples' inability to comprehend or participate in His suffering. 3. The dangers of moralizing narrative details Applying narrative details as imperatives or commands for Christian living can lead to forcing meaning into texts that are descriptive rather than prescriptive. While Christians are called to pray, going farther in the sense of self-imposed expectation can lead to legalism or guilt if not properly grounded in Scripture. Rather than using, he went a little further, as a challenge, the following passage more directly supports the idea of persistence in prayer and faith. Luke 18.1, the parable of the persistent widow, explicitly teaches the importance of praying and not losing heart. James 5.16-18, Elijah's fervent prayer is used as an example of the power of righteous prayer. Hebrews 12, the believer's call to endure, look to Jesus as the author and finisher of our faith without imposing arbitrary expectations. In other words, there are other texts If you wanted to teach this, this text has nothing to do with it. While the preacher's call to deeper prayer, service, and commitment may align with biblical principles, using he went a little further as a metaphorical challenge stretches the text meaning. The phrase describes Christ's unique role in his mission, not a direct call for believers to mimic his actions in that specific way. A better approach was to focus on how Jesus' mission and the disciples' failure calls us to rely on Christ's obedience and remain spiritually vigilant rather than imposing extra biblical challenges. AI literally just totally just destroyed that entire sermon. It just tore it apart. And all you needed to do was just know how to ask AI the right questions. See, as soon as I saw he went a little further and saw how the pastor was using it, I immediately knew that's a problem. That's taking a descriptive passage, making it prescriptive. It's about Jesus' physical movement. You're turning it into a metaphor, and if you even wanted to turn it into some kind of a metaphor or allegory, the point is, Jesus went further, and what is the contrast the text has made? He went further while the disciples fell asleep. Why did they fall asleep? Not because they weren't spiritually prepared, because they're human beings and we're frail and we're weak. Jesus went and obeyed. He did the will of God for us. It's the perfect story of Jesus went further because we can't. We will never obey the law perfectly. We will always fall short. So, we needed Jesus to go further because we could not. There we go, in 38 minutes, we have analyzed a sermon. We know what the sermon is completely about. We've looked at all the claims the sermon has made. We've already saw factual errors, logical errors, textual errors. We've identified everything. And within seconds, ladies and gentlemen. All right, let's try another one. Let's try another one. Let's go back. I'm gonna go to sermons. newest sermons. All right. Here we go. What do we have here? Here we go. Let's click on this. This one is a sermon, what it means to be holy based off John 6, 38 through 40. Again, I'm just using the sermon, the sermon audio website. This is a brand new sermon. I'm gonna click on the raw transcript. The iPad is asking me, do I want to download it? I'm going to download it. All right. I'm going to go back here. Hang on. Give me one second. I'm going to go back to AI. I'm going to go all the way back up to the top here. I'm going to copy. I'm going to select the text. Copy, because I need my prompt again. I need my prompt. All right. So I'm going to the plus sign on chat GPT. Attach files, 1042 AM, here's the one I just downloaded. I'm selecting it, I'm hitting open. Underneath it, I'm typing out my... My prompt, I just copied and pasted. Analyze the following sermon, summarize it and outline any factual errors, theological errors or inconsistency, logical fallacies, biblical and textual errors, list discussion questions and things for further study based on the sermon. All right, now clicking the little arrow. Now I wait. AI is analyzing the sermon. It's done. All right, that took maybe three seconds. Here's a detailed analysis of the sermon based on the provided transcript. Summary of the Sermon The sermon focuses on the theme of surrendering self-will and embracing the will of God as the essence of holiness, peace, and the Christian life. The speaker uses John 6, 38-40, and other passages to emphasize that Jesus' life was characterized by complete submission to the Father's will, devoid of self-interest. The sermon contrasts this with humanity's tendency toward self-will and self-righteousness due to the sinful nature inherited from Adam. The speaker argues that true holiness involves abandoning one's own plans and ambitions in favor of trusting in God's providential plan, resulting in peace and divine purpose. Main points of the sermon. Number one, Jesus as a model of holiness. Number two, the essence of sin and holiness. Number three, God's providential plan. Number four, examples of submission. And number five, holiness and daily life. Now, there's lots of sub points under all of this. It breaks the sermon down perfectly. But yeah, there's a lot here I could already start challenging theologically, but let's go to what AI found, all right? So there's the outline of the sermon again, and I'm not giving you the sub points. Number one, Jesus as the model of holiness. Number two, the essence of sin and holiness. Number three, God's providential plan. Number four, examples of submission. Number five, holiness and daily life. Again, AI gives me all of the sub points as well. It breaks it all down. I don't even need to listen to it, all right? Here we go. Factual errors and theological issues. Number one, overgeneralization of holiness. The sermon emphasized that holiness is achieved by having no will of our own. This can veer into an extreme form of passivity, ignoring the biblical teaching that believers are called to make decisions while seeking God's guidance. My issue would be, we can achieve holiness by having no will of our own? All right, ladies and gentlemen, we cannot achieve holiness in any meaningful way because holiness is completely sinlessness. We're always going to be in sin, but okay. Jesus' submission to the Father's will is unique due to his role in the plan of redemption. Applying this standard directly to believers without nuance may cause confusion about the difference between Christ's mission and human obedience." Well, yeah, it would be a major problem because Christ is not an example, right, so much. I mean, let me say this. He may serve as an example to some point, but here's the ultimate example. He could obey. He could do the will of God perfectly. We cannot. So, therefore, we look to Jesus as the one who did it for us, and we trust in his imputed righteousness. So, already, this sermon is going in directions that already is concerning. But, all right. But it's an overgeneralization, and I think it's taking a Jesus submission and almost making it like, now we can do the same thing. Let's see if it goes that direction, all right? So, number the second possible problem, determinism versus responsibility. The speaker strongly asserts that God's plan unfolds perfectly to the point that frustration or ambition is seen as a failure to trust God. So don't get frustrated. Don't have any ambition seems to be the point. However, scripture balances God's sovereignty with human responsibility. We could get into that discussion all day. Number three, the misuse of biblical references. The sermon uses passages like John 17 and Ephesians 2 without fully contextualizing them. For example, John 17 speaks about unity among believers as a testimony to the world, not directly about individual submission to God's will. 4. Problems of Selfishness as a Measure of Holiness The idea that the more self is killed, the holier a person becomes can lead to self-condemnation and legalism. This approach risks turning holiness into personal achievement rather than a work of God. 5. Confusion regarding vocation. The claim that failing to become a doctor or preacher is a sign that it wasn't God's will might oversimplify the complexity of life choices, personal responsibilities, and external circumstances. This risk implying that failure is always providential rather than considering human agency and effort. Now, all of that analysis raises lots of questions, and we can't really—we'd have to really listen to this and get into—I mean, this gets into some very deep theological issues about God's sovereignty, decree, providence, human responsibility, and we're never going to unpack all of that. So, okay. The AI then says the sermon has the following logical fallacies and inconsistencies. False dichotomy. The sermon presents a choice between total passivity and rebellion against God's will, ignoring the possibility of actively working while trusting God. For example, Paul's missionary journeys. So the sermon seems to give us a false dichotomy. Either it's total passivity or basically you're rebelling against God's will. And it says that's kind of a false dichotomy. Number two. It uses a story and other anecdotes, while emotionally compelling, does not constitute biblical proof for the claim that God's will is always revealed through suffering or resignation. So basically it gives us some of these anecdotal evidence. Hey, hey, look at this situation as if this proves something, but it's not from the Bible. He uses a story from somewhere else as some kind of It may be an emotional story, but it does not support biblically the claim that God's will is always revealed through suffering or just simply resigning or giving up to a specific thing. So, it's using a story outside of the Bible to try to make a biblical point or prove a biblical point. That's anecdotal evidence at best. All right, next. equating frustration with sin. The speaker implies that any frustration or dissatisfaction is a sign of sin and self-will. However, biblical figures like David and Paul experienced deep frustration and still walked faithfully with God. How about Job? Job talked about dissatisfaction and frustration. Did he sin? So there's a possible problem there. So then ask some questions. How does Jesus' submission to the Father in John 6 inform our understanding of personal surrender? 2. Is it possible to fully abandon our own will while still actively participating in God's work? 3. What is the biblical balance between trusting God's plan and making wise, intentional decisions? 4. How should we interpret setbacks and failures in our lives? Are they always signs of God's redirection? 5. How can we distinguish between legitimate desire and sinful self-interest? So those are the discussion questions that AI says we should consider in light of this sermon. Those are good questions. Those are good questions. I want to break each one of those down. I just want you to see my goal here is just to show you how quickly AI can give you discussion questions on a sermon, which is amazing tool. In fact, we'll probably be utilizing it a lot in 2025. All right. It says suggestions for further study. A.I. says read psalms of lament. And Paul's writings about suffering to understand how godly people handle frustration because A.I. wants us to see that you can be godly and still at times be frustrated. All right, another one. The role of human agency. Study stories like Nehemiah's rebuilding of the wall to see how faith and action work together in fulfilling God's purpose. So there we go. And it offers a little bit more information. There you go. Now I have a question. The sermon seems to imply that we can achieve perfect holiness. That's what it appears to me based on AI's breakdown. So I'm going to ask AI if that is an accurate understanding of the sermon. So I'm going to ask AI, is it accurate to say that the sermon was saying perfect holiness is achievable, achievable in this life. I'm gonna ask AI if I'm being accurate here. Alright, so here we go. A.I. says, Yes, it appears that the sermon suggests perfect holiness is achievable in this life based on the emphasis on selfishness and complete abandonment of self-will as the essence of holiness. The preacher presents Jesus' perfect submission to the Father's will as a model for believers to follow, indicating that the closer one gets to eradicating self-will, the holier they become. They are also statements implying that the more self is removed, the closer one gets to a state of being without sin or failure. Here are some key statements that imply this. 1. Jesus is the example of selfless holiness. Jesus Christ kept his hands off his own life, and he had no will of his own. The speaker claims that believers can achieve a state of no will of their own, which aligns with a portrayal of holiness. So according to this sermon, you can literally reach a point in your life where you have no will of your own. It is achievable. You can do it. Now just think, even if you have no will of your own, You still have a sinful nature. So for me to have no will of my own, would that not have to mean I would eradicate the sinful nature? So there's already a problem here. 2. The essence of sin is self. The essence of holiness is selflessness. The preacher repeatedly states that eradicating self equates to being holy, and that when self is entirely removed, sin is overcome. The more your self is out of this thing, the more you're going to be holy. So, clearly this sermon seems to be implying you can do it. Number three, a misrepresentation of scriptural commands. The preacher cites verses like Philippians 2.13, for it is God who works in you, and uses them to suggest that holiness involves no longer struggling with self. The language about being completely governed by the Spirit sounds like a belief in attaining sinless perfection and motivation and action. Theological problems with the view of this sermon. 1. Scriptural Reality of Sin in Believers 1 John states that if we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves. Paul's struggle with sin in Romans 7, 15-25 shows that even mature believers continue to wrestle with their sinful nature. 2. Confusing Sanctification with Glorification The sermon appears to confuse the progressive work of sanctification with glorification being made perfect in heaven. Scripture teaches that believers are being made holy, but will not achieve perfection until they are transformed in the presence of Christ. Potential for Legalism and Self-Deception The emphasis on eradicating self as the measure of holiness can lead to either pride, believing one has achieved holiness, or despair, realizing that one cannot. The sermon seems to imply that perfect holiness is achievable in this life by presenting selflessness as the ultimate goal. However, this view is inconsistent with biblical teaching, which acknowledges the ongoing presence of sin in the believer's life and places the hope of perfection and the resurrection and glorification not in earthly sanctification. The Christian life is marked by dependence on Christ's righteousness rather than striving for an unattainable perfection in this life. So, the sermon, AI is able to determine that the sermon completely obliterates the correct understanding of holiness by making it sound like it's achievable in this life. We cannot do it. I'm going to ask AI a follow-up question. Even if we reached some level of having no will of our own, that wouldn't mean we would be perfectly holy because we would still have a sinful nature and sin is far more than just having no self-will. Correct? All right, so I'm asking AI to go a little farther if we want to use the first sermon. A.I. says, you're absolutely correct. Even if someone were to achieve a state where they consistently sought to align their will with God, that would not make them perfectly holy because holiness involves more than the absence of self-will. Sin is pervasive in human nature and encompasses far more than just a struggle with self-will. Even the most faithful Christian still possesses a sinful nature, often referred to as the flesh, and they will until glorification. The Apostle Paul acknowledged this struggle in Romans 7. 2. Sin is far more than self-will. Sin manifests in multiple ways, not just through conscious self-will. Here are some examples. Ignorance and omission. Sometimes we sin unintentionally, Leviticus 4.2. Not doing what we should is still sin, James 4.17. Sinful internal attitudes. Sinful pride, envy, doubt, fear, and lust can arise without a deliberate act of will. Emotional reactions. We can sin in our hearts and emotions even when we are not consciously exercising self-will. Even when someone sincerely desires to please God, they can still sin because sin infects not only actions, but thoughts, motives, and desires. Next, holiness is more than selflessness. Biblical holiness involves not only the absence of sin, but also the presence of righteousness both inwardly and outwardly. Inwardly, love for God perfectly, and love for neighbor perfectly. Outwardly, actions that fully confirm to God's law and word, thought, and deed. Perfect worship and independence. True holiness includes worshiping God with a pure heart and fully depending on Him in every moment. Since even our best efforts are tainted by sin, holiness in this life is never perfect, even if we surrender our will." So the whole sermon just It's a mess. So we reviewed two sermons. No, we didn't even review. We analyzed two sermons utilizing AI and AI was able to clearly indicate, clearly demonstrate all of the problems in these sermons. geographical errors, logical errors, textual errors, biblical errors, theological errors. It was able to do so in—we reviewed both—AI was able to analyze both of those sermons in a total of probably less than 10 seconds, maybe about 7 to 8 seconds, and then any of my follow-up questions was answered within 3 to 4 seconds. Now, I will argue this. The more theology you know, The more hermeneutics you know, the more Bible you know, the better you will be at asking AI follow-up questions. And then you can work with AI to then, like we just did, to pull some different concepts out. I could then come up with a, we could work on a different interpretation of that John passage that was used in this sermon. We could work with AI to come up with a better interpretation of Matthew 26. See, the more you know, yes, I will state this, the more you know does give you a greater ability to utilize everything AI can do. But even someone with very little knowledge can ask AI to analyze a sermon, to critique a sermon, to point out problems in a sermon, to be able to determine, wait, is this accurate or is this not accurate? Is this logical? Is this inconsistent? I know that wasn't the most exciting thing to do, but what I wanted to demonstrate to you is how quickly AI could do that. I wanted to demonstrate to you, how is that going to change everything? Do you understand what can happen now? That one, a church member if their church has their sermon say on Sermon Audio, a church member can come home, once the sermon is uploaded, take the transcript, and within five to 10 seconds know every mistake, error, or problem their pastor committed or spoke in their sermon. that can literally, the pastor and the church can upload the sermon, and within 10 seconds after it's uploaded, someone can immediately go, pastor, you missed this, you missed this, you missed this, you missed this, you missed this, you missed this. In fact, while the pastor is preaching and he makes a claim, like, hey, the disciples could see the garden from the upper room, someone could literally open up chat GPT in the church, ask right there during the sermon, and depending on the type of church could possibly raise their hand and go, pastor, that's just not true. Or at least it appears it's not true. Where did you get your information? And even if he doesn't, they don't do it right there, they could do it after the sermon. Like that is gonna have a profound impact. When the pastor offers an interpretation, someone can literally ask AI and within five seconds go, well, this interpretation has lots of problems. Now, the more the person using ChatGPT, the more theology they know, the more Bible they know, the more they know, the better they can frame the question, the better they can ask the question. At first, it may be a little difficult, but the better you get at asking the question, really the only thing limiting your ability to get things from AI is your ability to ask the questions in a correct way. And that's where AI is today on January the 8th, 2025. Can you imagine where AI is going to be by the end of 2025? Now, if I wanted, I can go right now. I could take those passages of scripture that these sermons use. We're already in an hour, so I'll stop and won't do this. We're gonna be talking about it all year. But guess what? I can now go back and say, okay, create a exegetical, theologically sound, in-depth sermon on the very text that these sermons are based on, and AI will give me a theologically sound, biblically in-depth, exegetical sermon, and it will give it to me within five seconds. And I guarantee it will be an improvement of those sermons that we just broke down. I could sit here all day and just take the Sermons 2.0, the sermon audio website, look for, oh, a new sermon, analyze it. Oh, a new sermon, analyze it. I could just sit here and analyze sermons all day. Look, I've analyzed my own podcast episodes, and sometimes I'm like, oh man, that's brutal. It will rip me into shreds sometimes. I'll realize the mistakes I have made. And people are, trust me, there's people out there doing that right now to the things I have said. Now, where does that lead us? Where does that leave us? I don't know. I really don't know. I know it's a cliche to say it's a brave new world. Ladies and gentlemen, it's a brave new world. You can sit there all day and just upload the transcripts from sermons that are uploaded to Sermon Audio. Now, I do apologize at the beginning. That first one didn't work. I so wanted to analyze that first one. I knew there would be at least a little technical glitch, but the technical glitch wasn't with AI. The technical glitch was, why does that church not have the transcript available? What are you doing? What's going on? So, yeah. I don't know what else to say. I think we demonstrated what it can do. It's gotta impact sermons. It's got to. It's got to impact. I don't know. All right, there's more I could say, but I'll stop right there. I'll stop right there. All right, thanks for listening. 2025, the year of artificial intelligence. It's going to impact Christianity, ladies and gentlemen. You may not believe it. You may want to deny it. You may want to push back. You may not want to agree with my assessment, but I'm telling you, Nothing's ever going to be the same again. Now, Christianity will be five, 10 years behind. I know that. Christianity, the church loves to be behind. But you can be behind, but I'm telling you, you're becoming more, the church and Christianity, or not Christianity, the church, I should say, pastors, Bible teachers, theological-based podcasts, we're becoming irrelevant. AI can do anything a pastor can do far better, far quicker. AI can do anything I can do far better, far quicker, more accurate. I mean, I probably mispronounced who knows how many different things. When I was trying to get AI to work, I think my voice and my throat was making sounds. I was having to swallow a little bit more. AI doesn't have to have any of those problems. You can rip apart everything that I do. Some people say you're too repetitive. AI is not repetitive. I mean, you can just think of every mistake, every criticism I have ever received as a broadcaster. AI will never get any of those criticisms. ever. And it can do it much quicker than I can. Do you realize if I was to break down any of those sermons, if I was to listen to it and break it down, do you know how long that would take me to listen to the whole thing while taking notes, then working out everything it's claiming, then working out the problems, looking up I don't even know if I would have caught all of those issues. You know what? If I was listening to that sermon, I don't know if I would have caught, wait a minute, can they see the garden from the upper room? I don't even know if I would have caught that. All right, thanks for listening. Everyone have a great day. God bless.